> > > I think the grey area comes in through the definition of > > > "non-military targets". Since some people here believe that most > > > Palestinians support terrorism, it becomes a simple matter to > > > justify killing any Palestinian, since the argument would go that > > > supporting terrorism makes them an accomplice to terrorism and thus > > > a military target. > > > > I would argue that your logic is seriously flawed. > > And you would lose that argument, since the logic is fine. What you > argue below is that no one on the list, nor the Israelis, have used that > logical argument (which I hope is true). You give no support that the > argument is illogical. The problem is not with the logic, but with the > ambiguity of who is a military target when terrorism is occurring, and a > whole group of people are thought to support terrorism.
Bob Z replies I don't believe there is any logical imperative to move from support of terrorist to killing those people who support it in theory. But perhaps I should have used a different phrasing. My point is that for people onlist and I believe for the Israeli's there is a difference between supporting the notion of terror and planning and carrying out terrorist attacks. This is where an individual and a society's values come in to play. I think it says volumes that the Israeli's have not taken this course. > > An argument like I outline above HAS been used on the list to support > destroying the homes of people who are related to terrorists. It is > not a big step from there to killing. Bob Z But I here I disagree completely. I think it is a very big step for many people in real life. Destruction of life and destruction of property are very different for most humans. I think that our moral and legal codes recognize this distinction quite well. I think that many individuals consider stealing but would never consider murder, that societies punish people differently for these two crimes. > > By the way, why bother trying to find out if a group of people support > terrorism? I can think of two reasons. One possibility is the intention > to use that information to help prevent terrorism. Sounds good, but > if the answer is that the overwhelming majority of several million > people support terrorism, there isn't really much that can be done, is > there? The other reason is the intention to use that information, at > least in one's own mind, to justify doing something to those terrorist > supporters. Bob Z But this data does not come from the Israeli government but rather from a Journalistic source. Journalists gather information because it is part of their job it is how they pay the rent. They provide information. Governments will of course gather info as well. They need it to plan actions. > I hope that is true. You'll notice that I didn't claim that it had > been used, rather that it would be a simple matter to use such a > justification. Bob Z But I would argue that it would not be morally justifiable and that in this specific case the Israeli's continue to behave in a relatively moral way. > > > > Hmmm. I haven't seen discussion of polls on the thoughts of Israelis > on this matter. Have you seen any Israeli polls along the lines of, do > you support attacking the friends and family of terrorists Bob Z I haven't seen any poll results. It would be interesting to know what the Israeli public feels about this. The current government is right wing and very hawkish so I doubt that the public wants a more aggressive policy but I could be wrong. >
